![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt
A card with bad registration would seemingly be much less desirable then one with proper registration. As an example, I'd much prefer a card with creasing then looking at this, which gives me a headache: |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bobby Binder
It looks like Goudey made an attempt for the first 3D card..You ever try looking at it with those special glasses? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve
Should be worth twice as much. Getting two Lou's in one! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: MW
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joann
Matt, |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve
I think PSA does have a qualifier for such cards. OF Out of foucus. I have not seen many but they do use it from time to time |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kevin Saucier
Call me odd but I really like those type of cards and would prefer them for my collection...anything different and out of the ordinary. The fact it's Lou makes it that much better! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt
Steve - if ever there was a time of the PSA OF qualifier - wouldn't it have been the card above? How does SGC grade a card with EX+ corners and no creasing but awful registration? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
Yes. The slab companies should discount grade for registration problems. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Rob
tricky question on how it should be graded. i mean, just looking at it i'd give it a "1", but thats how it came from the factory, so it makes you wonder if focus should play a role in the grade or not. definately having a qualifier seems like the right way to go IMO. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brian E.
I think that registration should be a factor in grading |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kenneth A. Cohen
I too think that graders focus too much on the condition of the cardboard. Old Judges are a good example. I've recently purchased a couple of low grade OJs with beautiful image quality - but with back damage or pin holes. To me, and to most OJ collectors I think, such a card is more desireable than an EX-MT with a cloudy picture. The problem is that numerical grades are supposed to be attributed on a technical basis. We already bristle at the level of subjectivity inherent in grading. Injecting aesthetic, "non technical" factors such as registration will make it even moreso, which leads to the old cliche - Buy the card, not the holder. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JK
I think grading companies do account for registration - however, it is merely one factor out of many that are considered and its not weighted any greater than a crease, a wrinkle or centering. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JK
Oh - and with respect to the Gehrig shown above, unless there is something wrong with the back, that card is a solid 3 absent the registration issue. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jason L
You're odd! |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Corey R. Shanus
Conceptually a grade should reflect a card's desirability -- the higher the grade, the more desirable to the collector. Assuming one agrees with that statement, then I don't see how a card's registration should not factor into the mix. With that said, as we see with the case of blank-backed photographic cards (e.g., N172's, where a card with amazing photo quality and a glue stain on the verso can grade lower than a card with photo tones so light you can barely make out the player but with a clean back), common sense doesn't always prevail. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jay
Basically, this question is should the appearance of the card affect the grade. If it doesn't, other than verifying authenticity, what purpose does grading have? For Old Judge cards, in my opinion, other that verifying authenticity, slabbing does not make sense since photo clarity is not factored into the equation. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: ItsOnlyGil
Gentlemen, imho statements such as "I think grading companies do account for registration - however, it is merely one factor out of many that are considered and its not weighted any greater than a crease, a wrinkle or centering". |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Kevin Saucier
uh...yeah what he said |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe Jones
Here is a card that has an issue which is similar to bad registration. It was downgraded because of this. There is no creasing or paperloss. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Rob
I think Beckett use to do a terrific (and the best) job of breaking down a cards grade by having the 4 subgrades of centering, corners, edges, and surface. When purchasing a card online, three of the subgrades can usually be seen from a normal scan. However, the "surface" subgrade is the one that I felt was very helpful, as seing a wrinkle or light crease or poor registration is sometimes tough to see in an online scan. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: G. Maines
And this card should grade about vg/ex for preservation, |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Canadian Registration | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 05-06-2008 01:01 PM |
What are the qualities that factor into price volatility in T206s? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 17 | 10-07-2007 05:04 PM |
Why isn't Rarity the No.1 factor in determining a card's value? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 07-06-2006 06:59 PM |
Registration Fee | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 52 | 04-17-2006 03:16 PM |
the ex-cub factor as predictor of outcome | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 10-21-2004 03:34 PM |